John Wesley's theology

[Canuckster1127]

Rev 3:20 - "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me." NAKJV

Beautiful verse, Bryan.

Except it has nothing to do with justification or atonement. It is a warning to a church against apostasy.

Quite true, and so what? That would still affirm choice and free will. In this case however, it would just be in a different context than immediate soteriology.

[puritan lad]

Rev 3:20 - "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me." NAKJV

Beautiful verse, Bryan.

Except it has nothing to do with justification or atonement. It is a warning to a church against apostasy.

Quite true, and so what? That would still affirm choice and free will. In this case however, it would just be in a different context than immediate soteriology.

No one is denying choice or "free" will, only that neither has any role to play in justification. The scriptures are quite clear on that point.

I don't particularly like using the term "free will" (even though the WCF has an entire chapter dedicated to it). Few have really tried to explain exactly what it means. Just what is our will free from? What is it not free from?

[B. W.]

Rev 3:20 - "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me." NAKJV

Beautiful verse, Bryan.

Except it has nothing to do with justification or atonement. It is a warning to a church against apostasy.

John 10:7, 8, 9, "Then Jesus said to them again, "Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture." NKJV
-
-
-

[puritan lad]

John 10:7, 8, 9, "Then Jesus said to them again, "Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture." NKJV

That's a beautiful verse. Of course all who come to Christ will be saved. But the passage does not answer the question about how one comes to Christ, and it does not teach "free will", much less libertarian free will.

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand." (John 10:27-29)

The sheep, those for whom He died, will hear his voice, come to him, and be saved. Christ does not leave salvation in the hands of the sheep.

"But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:13)

"So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy." (Romans 9:16)

Could these passages be any clearer? If John and Paul had actually meant to say that it does not depend on human will, how better could they have expressed that idea?

"The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Corinthians 2:14)

Without being born of the Spirit first, man has neither the will, the ability, or the desire to come to Christ. But all that the Father gives to Christ will come to Christ. (John 6:37) Regeneration must proceed faith, and will inevitably lead to faith. It is not based on will, but rather changes the will, and indeed the entire creature.

[B. W.]

Exodus 33:9-11, "And it came to pass, when Moses entered the tabernacle, that the pillar of cloud descended and stood at the door of the tabernacle, and the LORD talked with Moses. 10 All the people saw the pillar of cloud standing at the tabernacle door, and all the people rose and worshiped, each man in his tent door. 11 So the LORD spoke to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend. And he would return to the camp, but his servant Joshua the son of Nun, a young man, did not depart from the tabernacle." NKJV

Interesting how the word door is used in the bible...

[RickD]

Does anyone know who said this? Apparently, he believed regeneration, logically didn't come before faith:

If I am to preach faith in Christ to a man who is regenerated, then the man, being regenerated, is saved already, and it is an unnec essary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to him, and bid him to believe in order to be saved when he is saved already, being regenerate. Am I only to preach faith to those who have it? Absurd, indeed! Is not this waiting till the man is cured and then bringing him the medicine? This is preaching Christ to the righteous and not to sinners.

[Canuckster1127]

Charles Spurgeon is the source of that Quote.

[DannyM]

Interesting how the word door is used in the bible...

Is it? In what way is it interesting?

[neo-x]

I see you guys haven't gotten anywhere on this...I wanted to post and continue the debate but the there is so much jumping around old posts and new, by everyone that I decided to just read what you guys are discussing.

just a thing

puritan lad on Fri Dec 23, 2011 10:29 pm

neo-x wrote:
If you apply your meaning of the word "world" in Rom 12:2 it becomes absolutely pointless and ridiculous

Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is--his good, pleasing and perfect will.

Is Paul saying do not be like the elect scattered all over the world. If TULIP is scriptural then it has to be consistent all the way.

apply it to 1 John 2:15

"Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him."

what? is John saying do not love the elect scattered all over the world? If you love the world (meaning the elect as you said that he implied some verses earlier) you do not love the father????

Please do explain.

neo-x,

Following this reasoning, you have God telling us to hate the very world that he loves. Are we to hate every single person on the planet?

I'm afraid you'll have to try again.

Well its great to see you get to the point ahead of me, you made my point so obvious, PL. So you agree then that the word "world" would have different meanings and not the same meaning as "elect" in all those passages, as you said. Nice try on the straw man though, God telling us to hate the world! where did it say, hate the world???

By the way, I can see that you guys have not gotten anywhere except disagreements. Not to discredit anyone's efforts here, just saying that while I did enjoy some great posts and insights in here, but now almost the same stuff is thrown over each others head. The Bible is much more than Calvinism vs Arminianism. I still am not convinced in the case for Calvinism, nor do I think it has much of a case but again, this is just me and I don't want to cause hurt or offence to my brothers in Christ. I don't think debating it at this point is going to change any bit of it. Frankly, I am a bit tired of explaining things over and over again and misrepresented at times or not understood at others. It is no one's fault actually as its not a simple topic and more so, there is no unified framework being addressed here, not Calvinism, neither the other. So I am going to sit back and see you guys work this out.

One word though, we are called to be born-again believers and not Calvinists, Arminianists, etc etc, keep that at the back of your head, If you believe in Christ and Christ is in you, you are Child of God, Period. Let no one tell you otherwise.

[RickD]

Is the "living and active" Word of God (Hebrews 4:12), alive enough, to penetrate the heart of any "spiritually dead" sinner? Can the gospel persuade any unregenerate sinner to confess his sins and repent?

[B. W.]

Interesting how the word door is used in the bible...

Is it? In what way is it interesting?

Seek and you shall find...

[Philip]

I find it bewildering that folks that believe that a person must be regenerated before they can believe in God, that there is NO choice before ANYONE to personally decide whether or not to embrace God, are hanging out on a website with a key part of its mission statement being to “encourage skeptics to examine the truth claims of Christianity.” If God does ALL related to salvation – as we supposedly have no choice to make, then what the heck is this website for to begin with? Other than proclaiming the Gospel, the rest would all be a mountain of wasted words, at least as they relate to or playing a role in anyone’s salvation or of ENCOURAGING or CONVINCING anyone to accept Christ. Further, the mission stated on this site also says, “our goal is to present the scientific and biblical evidence that supports a rational belief in the existence and love of God.” Huh? According to Five Point Calvinism, no rational thinking by man can discern such.

Further, I’d ask what in the world was Paul trying to do in Acts 17: 2-4: “…on three Sabbath days he REASONED with them from the Scriptures, explaining and PROVING that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, "This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ." “And some of them were PERSUADED and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women.” Gee, Scripture tells us Paul used rational evidences and arguments that were key to people believing in Christ, as THEY were PERSUADED – BY PAUL. Hmmm, but how could this be possible if there is no CHOICE to begin with? In fact, why did Paul not merely preach the Gospel and hope God would regenerate some? How did he PROVE Christ and the Gospel to un-regenerated men and women? And if God merely regenerates BEFORE belief, why did they even need to be persuaded – BY PAUL or his rational EVIDENCES? And how COULD they be? Why would he even have put forth such arguments, as regeneration would have saved Paul a whole lot of time and human effort - that would have (supposedly) been useless anyway?

The Bible is filled with God giving evidences for belief. But, without man able to decide anything or without a choice, WHY? Jesus Himself said, “Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me” – but did all who heard him say this obey? (John 14:11) Peter reminded the unbelievers of his day that Christ was “a man accredited by God to [them] by miracles, wonders and signs” (Acts 2:22). In John 4:48, Jesus stated, "Unless you people see signs and wonders, YOU simply will not believe." So, if they must be first regenerated, why would they have to FIRST see miraculous things to believe – obviously things that CONVINCED them to do so? Why would THEY have to SEE anything – IF regeneration was key to their subsequent belief?

EVIDENCE is for MEN who have a CHOICE - a God-given choice with God's sovereign parameters framing them! There is no need for evidence in Five Point Calvinism.

[B. W.]

...One word though, we are called to be born-again believers and not Calvinists, Arminianists, etc etc, keep that at the back of your head, If you believe in Christ and Christ is in you, you are Child of God, Period. Let no one tell you otherwise.

The best post so far on this thread!

[Byblos]

I find it bewildering that folks that believe that a person must be regenerated before they can believe in God, that there is NO choice before ANYONE to personally decide whether or not to embrace God, are hanging out on a website with a key part of its mission statement being to “encourage skeptics to examine the truth claims of Christianity.” If God does ALL related to salvation – as we supposedly have no choice to make, then what the heck is this website for to begin with? Other than proclaiming the Gospel, the rest would all be a mountain of wasted words, at least as they relate to or playing a role in anyone’s salvation or of ENCOURAGING or CONVINCING anyone to accept Christ. Further, the mission stated on this site also says, “our goal is to present the scientific and biblical evidence that supports a rational belief in the existence and love of God.” Huh? According to Five Point Calvinism, no rational thinking by man can discern such.

Further, I’d ask what in the world was Paul trying to do in Acts 17: 2-4: “…on three Sabbath days he REASONED with them from the Scriptures, explaining and PROVING that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, "This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ." “And some of them were PERSUADED and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women.” Gee, Scripture tells us Paul used rational evidences and arguments that were key to people believing in Christ, as THEY were PERSUADED – BY PAUL. Hmmm, but how could this be possible if there is no CHOICE to begin with? In fact, why did Paul not merely preach the Gospel and hope God would regenerate some? How did he PROVE Christ and the Gospel to un-regenerated men and women? And if God merely regenerates BEFORE belief, why did they even need to be persuaded – BY PAUL or his rational EVIDENCES? And how COULD they be? Why would he even have put forth such arguments, as regeneration would have saved Paul a whole lot of time and human effort - that would have (supposedly) been useless anyway?

The Bible is filled with God giving evidences for belief. But, without man able to decide anything or without a choice, WHY? Jesus Himself said, “Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me” – but did all who heard him say this obey? (John 14:11) Peter reminded the unbelievers of his day that Christ was “a man accredited by God to [them] by miracles, wonders and signs” (Acts 2:22). In John 4:48, Jesus stated, "Unless you people see signs and wonders, YOU simply will not believe." So, if they must be first regenerated, why would they have to FIRST see miraculous things to believe – obviously things that CONVINCED them to do so? Why would THEY have to SEE anything – IF regeneration was key to their subsequent belief?

EVIDENCE is for MEN who have a CHOICE - a God-given choice with God's sovereign parameters framing them! There is no need for evidence in Five Point Calvinism.

Do you really have a point to make Philip other than just asserting the same thing over and over again? Please spare us your sense of incredulity, really, it is just insulting. Can you honestly say that you have it all figured out when theologians and apologists from all walks and disciplines still grapple with such a topic? And if you haven't gotten it all figured out at least allow others some skepticism of your position as they afford you the same courtesy of theirs.

[B. W.]

-
-
Everyone Please Slow Down

Problem with these kinds of debates is the application of preconceived misnomers. Any time the words Free Will are mentioned it is soon labeled and classed as open theism, pelagian which unfairly equals too Armenianism. Such black and white thinking prevents any head way ever being made in discussions like these. All who disagree must be forced to submit to a certain world view determined by a founder's logic as the only way. Tragically, these words of Jesus no longer have meaning anymore:

“John said to Him, "Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name, and we tried to prevent him because he was not following us." But Jesus said, "Do not hinder him, for there is no one who will perform a miracle in My name, and be able soon afterward to speak evil of Me."For he who is not against us is for us.” Mark 9:38-40 NASB

People slay each other, murder friendships, why – just to prove whom they love more than Christ was right. Jesus is correct, a tree is known by its fruits. The fruits of certain black and white legalistic thinking have caused great disservice to the cause of Christ. In the hands of the atheist, such theology can be mocked and disproven with ease.

When one side tries to explain what they mean by free will, it is immediately attacked without thought to what the person was really trying to say by reproving tones of - that’s Pelagianism, open theism, etc and etc. They are accused of without trial, without hearing, without justice, without grace, and found guilty of a crime that is no crime. The harshest of words and snarkiest comments are made. This fosters equal response back. Nothing is accomplished,

Why? All for the sake that the founders of their respective religious system are right; Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. Jesus was correct about that – whom and what one loves bubbles out of the heart: too bad so little of Christ comes to the surface,

The result - tells all the other parts of the body of Christ that since they are not all eyes, they can’t be the body of Christ, for only the eyes have it correct. 1 Corinthians 12 is tossed out the window. He who is for us is not against us, is not adhered too. Which side does such wrangling come from the most and what causes so much strife? Something is wrong and a revision of doctrine is sorely needed to restore sanity and people back into the image of Christ like virtue God predestined us to become.


God Bless you all…

-